deploy_site

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and reveals key behaviors: files staged to temp directory, incremental upload (only missing bytes), CloudFront serving, and free pricing. It does not contradict any annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, each delivering distinct value: purpose, transport mechanism, and result/pricing. No redundancy or excess text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the process, result (URL via CloudFront), and cost (free). It misses potential details like error conditions or explicit return format but remains largely complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The mention of 'inline file bytes' reinforces but does not extend the semantics of the files parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Deploy') and resource ('a static site (HTML/CSS/JS) from inline file bytes'), and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like deploy_site_dir by emphasizing inline bytes and the transport mechanism.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for deploying static sites from inline bytes and mentions the free tier, but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like deploy_site_dir or deploy_function, nor provides when-not-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.